From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org (ibis-users) To: ibis-users-digest@eda.org Subject: ibis-users V1 #174 Reply-To: Sender: owner-ibis-users@eda.org Errors-To: owner-ibis-users@eda.org Precedence: bulk ibis-users Thursday, June 2 2011 Volume 01 : Number 174 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 18:05:54 -0600 From: "Mirmak, Michael" Subject: [IBIS-Users] Agenda, IBIS Summit at DAC - June 7, 2011 - ------=_NextPart_000_055E_01CC1FB5.003E8260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit - ------------------------------------------------------------------ AGENDA, IBIS SUMMIT MEETING Tuesday, June 7, 2011 Gallery 2 The Omni's Gallery Space Omni Hotel San Diego, CA (check signs at site) - ------------------------------------------------------------------ 8:00 AM Refreshments & Sign In 8:30 AM Introductions - Welcome to Summit - Introductions - Opens for Issues, Discussion Topics 8:45 AM IBIS in Review Michael Mirmak, Intel Corp. 9:00 AM IBIS PDN Feature Simulation Studies Randy Wolff, Micron Lance Wang, IO Methodology 9:45 AM IBIS-ATM Task Group Status Update Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corporation 10:00 AM Break 10:15 AM Compliant IBIS Package Models Walter Katz, Signal Integrity Software (SiSoft) 10:45 AM Comparison of the Recent Analog Modeling BIRD Proposals Arpad Muranyi, Mentor Graphics Corporation 11:15 AM IBIS in Academia Bob Ross, Teraspeed Consulting Group 11:45 AM Election of Officers 12:00 PM LUNCH - Pre-registration required 1:00 PM AMI Modeling Methodology and Measurement Correlation of a 6.25 Gb/s Link Ryan Coats, NetLogic Microsystems Antonis Orphanou, NetLogic Microsystems Manuel Luschas, NetLogic Microsystems Amolak Badesha, Agilent Technologies Nilesh Kamdar, Agilent Technologies 1:45 PM BIRD Proposal: Extending IBIS-AMI to Support Back-Channel Communications Marcus Van Lerssel, Snowbush IP (Gennum) Kumar Keshavan, Sigrity Ken Willis, Sigrity Walter Katz, Signal Integrity Software (SiSoft) 2:15 PM Compliant IBIS-AMI Models Walter Katz, Signal Integrity Software (SiSoft) Todd Westerhoff, Signal Integrity Software (SiSoft) 3:15 PM BREAK 3:30 PM Ad Hoc Topics - IBIS 5.1 and 5.2 Planning - Discussion on Previous and New Material 4:55 PM Concluding Items - Next Meeting - July 9, 2010 - Next Summits in Asia 5:00 PM End of IBIS Summit Meeting - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ REGISTRATION People involved in IBIS Model development, EDA tool development, and digital circuit design are invited to participate to the Summit meeting. If you plan to participate, please register with the information below: Name: E-mail address: Company: Telephone: Please send registrations to Lance Wang (lwang@iometh.com) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - ------=_NextPart_000_055E_01CC1FB5.003E8260 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEH AQAAoIIdwzCCAyAwggKJoAMCAQICBDXe9M8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwTjEL MAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxEDAOBgNVBAoTB0VxdWlmYXgxLTArBgNVBAsTJEVxdWlm YXggU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1dGhvcml0eTAeFw05ODA4MjIxNjQx NTFaFw0xODA4MjIxNjQxNTFaME4xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRAwDgYDVQQKEwdF cXVpZmF4MS0wKwYDVQQLEyRFcXVpZmF4IFNlY3VyZSBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBB dXRob3JpdHkwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBAMFdsVhnCGLu oJotHwhtkRRomAoe/toEbxOEYiHD0XzOnwXguAHwTjTs4oqVBGSs8WtTXwWz y2eAv0ICjv7dAQns4QAUT/z78AzdQ7pbK+EfgHCZFVeTFvEPl2q3wmgjHMxN WTCsUR47ryvW7mNFe8XZX1DS41APOojnvxT94Me5AgMBAAGjggEJMIIBBTBw BgNVHR8EaTBnMGWgY6BhpF8wXTELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxEDAOBgNVBAoTB0Vx dWlmYXgxLTArBgNVBAsTJEVxdWlmYXggU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1 dGhvcml0eTENMAsGA1UEAxMEQ1JMMTAaBgNVHRAEEzARgQ8yMDE4MDgyMjE2 NDE1MVowCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFEjmaPkr0rKV10fYIyAQ TzOYkJ/UMB0GA1UdDgQWBBRI5mj5K9KylddH2CMgEE8zmJCf1DAMBgNVHRME BTADAQH/MBoGCSqGSIb2fQdBAAQNMAsbBVYzLjBjAwIGwDANBgkqhkiG9w0B AQUFAAOBgQBYzinq/Pfetc4CuRe1hdG54+CVzCUxDQCmkm5/tpJjnlCV0Zpv 5BHeY4VumO6o/1rI01WyZnFX3sAh6z0qpyNJAQSGQnv87n+iFlK1Z2fTQNs7 JliyKHc9rhR3Ydb6KmYnoA36p3Nc6nDxlCFlRF/6/O8paKmih3nvee9PrAd3 ODCCAz0wggKmoAMCAQICAwWw/zANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBOMQswCQYDVQQG EwJVUzEQMA4GA1UEChMHRXF1aWZheDEtMCsGA1UECxMkRXF1aWZheCBTZWN1 cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA2MDIxNjE4MDEzMFoXDTE2 MDIxOTE4MDEzMFowUjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxGjAYBgNVBAoTEUludGVsIENv cnBvcmF0aW9uMScwJQYDVQQDEx5JbnRlbCBFeHRlcm5hbCBCYXNpYyBQb2xp Y3kgQ0EwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQDBpd/XOb9Q VqEZ8mQ1042TdOIq3ATDIsV2xDyt30yLyMR5Wjtus0bn3B+he89BiNO/LP6+ rFzEwlD55PlX+HLGIKeNNG97dqyc30FElEUjZzTZFq2N4e3kVJ/XAEEgANzV 8v9qp7qWwxugPgfc3z9BkYot+CifozexHLb/hEZj+yISCU61kRZvuSQ0E11y YL4dRgcglJeaHo3oX57rvIckaLsYV5/1Aj+R8DM1Ppk965XQAKsHfnyT7C4S 50T4lVn4lz36wOdNZn/zegG1zp41lnoTFfT4KuKVJH5x7YD1p6KbgJCKLovn ujGuohquBNfdXKpZkvz6pGv+iC1HawJdAgMBAAGjgaAwgZ0wDgYDVR0PAQH/ BAQDAgEGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQaxgxKxEdvqNutK/D0Vgaj7TdUDDA6BgNVHR8E MzAxMC+gLaArhilodHRwOi8vY3JsLmdlb3RydXN0LmNvbS9jcmxzL3NlY3Vy ZWNhLmNybDAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBRI5mj5K9KylddH2CMgEE8zmJCf1DAPBgNV HRMBAf8EBTADAQH/MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4GBABMQOK2kVKVIlUWwLTdy wJ+e2O+PC/uQltK2F3lRyrPfBn69tOkIP4SgDJOfsxyobIrPLe75kBLw+Dom 13OBDp/EMZJZ1CglQfVV8co9mT3aZMjSGGQiMgkJLR3jMfr900fXZKj5XeqC J+JP0mEhJGEdVCY+FFlksJjV86fDrq1QMIIFYzCCBEugAwIBAgIKYSyl/gAA AAAABjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBSMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEaMBgGA1UEChMR SW50ZWwgQ29ycG9yYXRpb24xJzAlBgNVBAMTHkludGVsIEV4dGVybmFsIEJh c2ljIFBvbGljeSBDQTAeFw0wNjAzMjIyMjIyNDdaFw0xMjAzMjIyMjMyNDda MFYxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRowGAYDVQQKExFJbnRlbCBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbjEr MCkGA1UEAxMiSW50ZWwgRXh0ZXJuYWwgQmFzaWMgSXNzdWluZyBDQSAzQjCC ASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAMDoHJYUGvcdR4k0Qv8/ RrwNX4+vEe5PN2LnGn4xfIWwdUbk5+zvrRy1HjoKdG/AShZfxAuFoVyNIah5 GJLpiS/vGbsDYKK+EZcIcmtPfvbB9Yg09EnQ0OpsZ2ORRd5lYUfMUU+zkpgL 96vKFdkiG+eeHEwnSS3VikGVrF7UDdKfvxZwRwQCx6rEHAFPCjBDVfGYZuYT 1EDhSDvzEiU7KzBsxrdBCFU4RYL7kh+do+vyMDlBzpw3WKvMVbf3s5lxYiY7 AjEhU8OSyZEQlgtK8PNyifHjmyrSaeJrPshM3PuLFG4d3gm1UJEiGNzxcHGb 6YLP29IQAwY5mAk8j+UOVcsCAwEAAaOCAjUwggIxMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMB Af8wHQYDVR0OBBYEFG/DcREooZ0ZV/VnV8/ZKSaI1aWiMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIB hjAQBgkrBgEEAYI3FQEEAwIBADAZBgkrBgEEAYI3FAIEDB4KAFMAdQBiAEMA QTAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQaxgxKxEdvqNutK/D0Vgaj7TdUDDCBvQYDVR0fBIG1 MIGyMIGvoIGsoIGphk5odHRwOi8vd3d3LmludGVsLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5 L0NSTC9JbnRlbCUyMEV4dGVybmFsJTIwQmFzaWMlMjBQb2xpY3klMjBDQS5j cmyGV2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZXMuaW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkv Q1JML0ludGVsJTIwRXh0ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMFBvbGljeSUyMENBLmNy bDCB4wYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgdYwgdMwYwYIKwYBBQUHMAKGV2h0dHA6Ly93d3cu aW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvY2VydGlmaWNhdGVzL0ludGVsJTIwRXh0 ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMFBvbGljeSUyMENBLmNydDBsBggrBgEFBQcwAoZg aHR0cDovL2NlcnRpZmljYXRlcy5pbnRlbC5jb20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9jZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZXMvSW50ZWwlMjBFeHRlcm5hbCUyMEJhc2ljJTIwUG9saWN5JTIw Q0EuY3J0MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBAiWWHL6T21QXFZDyaUIye0jh7 f40GXqi75Ro5JbpROtlZBqyRq6oPMAG6Igxd5Bd9TMtNkOvguknFnK1y17Ud MhLOl+FuInE+FAWk803aRW27OsX+ot0KmPioKnZ3L1K5qcQS3tp6or7AaZzd 0w0qFitm4UfP9nnTXQtY9XM5QJ07IKFDE3tlOlamKhjbiJV3FKigCVesPZSx 9h2G7Ve4irEfz915Vks26AJHGZagEHNxM9exkgem4ENsG+t0vYqn9x7YsqJ6 fmbOSyrzjzb3CYeEfyE5SL+f3Vx9uMsQDyb8LVCDBXQtxLEHnFEBPrRSSF9k Pmyjavx4UqFdPEyCMIIFijCCBHKgAwIBAgIKYSCKYgAAAAAACDANBgkqhkiG 9w0BAQUFADBSMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEaMBgGA1UEChMRSW50ZWwgQ29ycG9y YXRpb24xJzAlBgNVBAMTHkludGVsIEV4dGVybmFsIEJhc2ljIFBvbGljeSBD QTAeFw0wOTA1MTUxOTI3MjZaFw0xNTA1MTUxOTM3MjZaMFYxCzAJBgNVBAYT AlVTMRowGAYDVQQKExFJbnRlbCBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbjErMCkGA1UEAxMiSW50 ZWwgRXh0ZXJuYWwgQmFzaWMgSXNzdWluZyBDQSAzQjCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAKQEM1Wn9TU9vc9C+/Tc7KB+eiYElmrcEWE3 2WUdHvWG+IcQHVQsikTmMyKKojNLw2B5s6Iekc8ivDo/wCfjZzX9JyftMnc+ AArc0la87Olybzm8K9jXEfTBvTnUSFSiI9ZYefITdiUgqlAFuljFZEHYKYtL uhrRacpmQfP4mV63NKdc2bT804HRf6YptZFa4k6YN94zlrGNrBuQQ74WFzz/ jLBusbUpEkro6Mu/ZYFOFWQrV9lBhF9Ruk8yN+3N6n9fUo/qBigiF2kEn9xV h1ykl7SCGL2jBUkXx4qgV27a6Si8lRRdgrHGtN/HWnSWlLXTH5l575H4Lq++ 77OFv38CAwEAAaOCAlwwggJYMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wHQYDVR0OBBYE FA7GKvdZsggQkCVvw939imYxMCvFMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIBhjASBgkrBgEEAYI3 FQEEBQIDAQABMCMGCSsGAQQBgjcVAgQWBBQ5oFY2ekKQ/5Ktim+VdMeSWb4Q WTAZBgkrBgEEAYI3FAIEDB4KAFMAdQBiAEMAQTAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQaxgxK xEdvqNutK/D0Vgaj7TdUDDCBvQYDVR0fBIG1MIGyMIGvoIGsoIGphk5odHRw Oi8vd3d3LmludGVsLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L0NSTC9JbnRlbCUyMEV4dGVy bmFsJTIwQmFzaWMlMjBQb2xpY3klMjBDQS5jcmyGV2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0aWZp Y2F0ZXMuaW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvQ1JML0ludGVsJTIwRXh0ZXJu YWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMFBvbGljeSUyMENBLmNybDCB4wYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgdYw gdMwYwYIKwYBBQUHMAKGV2h0dHA6Ly93d3cuaW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRv cnkvY2VydGlmaWNhdGVzL0ludGVsJTIwRXh0ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMFBv bGljeSUyMENBLmNydDBsBggrBgEFBQcwAoZgaHR0cDovL2NlcnRpZmljYXRl cy5pbnRlbC5jb20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZXMvSW50ZWwlMjBF eHRlcm5hbCUyMEJhc2ljJTIwUG9saWN5JTIwQ0EuY3J0MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEB BQUAA4IBAQCxtQEHchVQhXyjEqtMVUMe6gkmPsIczHxSeqNbo9dsD+6xbT65 JT+oYgpIAtfEsYXeUJu1cChqpb22U5bMAz7eaQcW5bzefufWvA6lg2048B8o czBj/q+5P5NpYrUO8jOmN4jTjfJq3ElZ7yFWpy7rB3Vm/aN6ATYqWfMbS/xf h+JCxmH3droUmMJI0/aZJHsLtjbjFnNsHDNrJZX1vxlM78Lb1hjskTENPmhb VbfTj5i/ZGnhv4tmI8QZPCNtcegXJrfhRl2D9bWpdTOPrWiLDUqzy1Z6KL7T cOS/PCl8RHCJXkPau/thTQCpIoDa2+c+3XA++gRTfAQ4svTO260NMIIGEzCC BPugAwIBAgIKEpUSdwABAABiszANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADBWMQswCQYDVQQG EwJVUzEaMBgGA1UEChMRSW50ZWwgQ29ycG9yYXRpb24xKzApBgNVBAMTIklu dGVsIEV4dGVybmFsIEJhc2ljIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EgM0IwHhcNMTEwMTEyMTgz MjMxWhcNMTMxMjI3MTgzMjMxWjBDMRgwFgYDVQQDEw9NaXJtYWssIE1pY2hh ZWwxJzAlBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWGG1pY2hhZWwubWlybWFrQGludGVsLmNvbTCC ASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALXYbdPzLDd/kLEoQhLw UDsj7KHSRoVolg23SzP/M4R+Vagv9f2V1vJMbSxPsJkdXNd9IE1vIEPK0n++ F3Q2R4iyIm1jml9GFYXHQQ+wizl8JPzHS6sKFTsh4X6HTrGw3TaRgGjwutC8 q/pAYZv5bJc3ehjaizCSD8gWB+sJxdOTRsPPXgr0s+Jt2Clqwmoz5TmyjhMi 07awfeAdolarXaYva4eBrA3xSb7HAJXTajOwmZ7ovbV3HvtAk8Y3+CPJLfyC C9fN+TwyfBRlONS5QqoV+3mIJQoqypAOTDYJ3E9cl4KatHromscRE2YwcY44 jPhqWbfwfjJztPOqiRH8j0ECAwEAAaOCAvQwggLwMAsGA1UdDwQEAwIHgDA8 BgkrBgEEAYI3FQcELzAtBiUrBgEEAYI3FQiGw4x1hJnlUYP9gSiFjp9TgpHA CWeB3r05lfBDAgFkAgEIMB0GA1UdDgQWBBQ79lhXEYe7MUo/+uOvVs/OLQVD NjAfBgNVHSMEGDAWgBQOxir3WbIIEJAlb8Pd/YpmMTArxTCBzwYDVR0fBIHH MIHEMIHBoIG+oIG7hldodHRwOi8vd3d3LmludGVsLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5 L0NSTC9JbnRlbCUyMEV4dGVybmFsJTIwQmFzaWMlMjBJc3N1aW5nJTIwQ0El MjAzQigxKS5jcmyGYGh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZXMuaW50ZWwuY29tL3Jl cG9zaXRvcnkvQ1JML0ludGVsJTIwRXh0ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMElzc3Vp bmclMjBDQSUyMDNCKDEpLmNybDCB9QYIKwYBBQUHAQEEgegwgeUwbAYIKwYB BQUHMAKGYGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuaW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvY2VydGlm aWNhdGVzL0ludGVsJTIwRXh0ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMElzc3VpbmclMjBD QSUyMDNCKDEpLmNydDB1BggrBgEFBQcwAoZpaHR0cDovL2NlcnRpZmljYXRl cy5pbnRlbC5jb20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZXMvSW50ZWwlMjBF eHRlcm5hbCUyMEJhc2ljJTIwSXNzdWluZyUyMENBJTIwM0IoMSkuY3J0MB8G A1UdJQQYMBYGCCsGAQUFBwMEBgorBgEEAYI3CgMMMCkGCSsGAQQBgjcVCgQc MBowCgYIKwYBBQUHAwQwDAYKKwYBBAGCNwoDDDBNBgNVHREERjBEoCgGCisG AQQBgjcUAgOgGgwYbWljaGFlbC5taXJtYWtAaW50ZWwuY29tgRhtaWNoYWVs Lm1pcm1ha0BpbnRlbC5jb20wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADggEBADzfpGtSAark 2sVvdD205ox9hNNleO9Kl5uO67i1cII2+VztoQTFOybJ7Wc/n9OXSfO9Al5z LxEN7QsyQYNHedeBJnlhyL3KB5Z3dPkm4kfgGRqFULuqLWUDUHDy4ZYKkBND RLYMb3bLHeCknm0lPngeYX4Ni0eLfGf2gbXByqJIp2rVmtePDnIjQfhA3Vzq pGyI7N3xYcYmO7yH4S21fsBjWakyJthY8Mhf4EnaR0qhwgldYEephTPeB4IH dBWPXRrUvJ9zcb36oo+Uq5P95qGJ1bcq7IhdvSPHwRqN8/vrcqEe53jJcvUH BtUWANg1gEp30/heukYjVciXy27VEpMwggZOMIIFNqADAgECAgpqrTEDAAAA ADAPMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMFYxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRowGAYDVQQKExFJ bnRlbCBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbjErMCkGA1UEAxMiSW50ZWwgRXh0ZXJuYWwgQmFz aWMgSXNzdWluZyBDQSAzQjAeFw0wODEwMTgwMTM5MTlaFw0xMTEwMTgwMTM5 MTlaMEMxGDAWBgNVBAMTD01pcm1haywgTWljaGFlbDEnMCUGCSqGSIb3DQEJ ARYYbWljaGFlbC5taXJtYWtAaW50ZWwuY29tMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEF AAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAxpMctS7marn/zxraCf/dpq/KbJUhLJ8oTFUZXKeW 5UERk4LfsSWqZHgJgXNWx/DRFjd/nxGt22V6OYr2ovzn6OGDTTn/XazZ0lz2 CMkxQG4XlL7iGz5CcDJLqNmtWudHhv8oyZgjsDMueeCUW7SrYg0OSb0HQy6/ qw6sNpOK+px7dFLchdhsoDB/tyx6+Wk91WWqzK+iEHjjO4POHpaX22kwT6UE a0/Z099bZkY/P7r0sC8zPYNBacWiBXSUJDC7iADxGTYqW6iYLdTg6l6ZTG11 2oYH4Nar0Vyd3QDX9AnrP0pYxc4ToynLKb7tPAMPJB+lDCARUatOnRqvVGID ZQIDAQABo4IDLzCCAyswCwYDVR0PBAQDAgQwMEQGCSqGSIb3DQEJDwQ3MDUw DgYIKoZIhvcNAwICAgCAMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMEAgIAgDAHBgUrDgMCBzAKBggq hkiG9w0DBzAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUXxBURxeU31S7sIgndptL/kLkWokwPQYJKwYB BAGCNxUHBDAwLgYmKwYBBAGCNxUIhsOMdYSZ5VGD/YEohY6fU4KRwAlnhLnZ QYeE/04CAWQCAQkwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUb8NxESihnRlX9WdXz9kpJojVpaIw gckGA1UdHwSBwTCBvjCBu6CBuKCBtYZUaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbnRlbC5jb20v cmVwb3NpdG9yeS9DUkwvSW50ZWwlMjBFeHRlcm5hbCUyMEJhc2ljJTIwSXNz dWluZyUyMENBJTIwM0IuY3Jshl1odHRwOi8vY2VydGlmaWNhdGVzLmludGVs LmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L0NSTC9JbnRlbCUyMEV4dGVybmFsJTIwQmFzaWMl MjBJc3N1aW5nJTIwQ0ElMjAzQi5jcmwwge8GCCsGAQUFBwEBBIHiMIHfMGkG CCsGAQUFBzAChl1odHRwOi8vd3d3LmludGVsLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L2Nl cnRpZmljYXRlcy9JbnRlbCUyMEV4dGVybmFsJTIwQmFzaWMlMjBJc3N1aW5n JTIwQ0ElMjAzQi5jcnQwcgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGZmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0 ZXMuaW50ZWwuY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvY2VydGlmaWNhdGVzL0ludGVsJTIw RXh0ZXJuYWwlMjBCYXNpYyUyMElzc3VpbmclMjBDQSUyMDNCLmNydDAfBgNV HSUEGDAWBggrBgEFBQcDBAYKKwYBBAGCNwoDBDApBgkrBgEEAYI3FQoEHDAa MAoGCCsGAQUFBwMEMAwGCisGAQQBgjcKAwQwTQYDVR0RBEYwRKAoBgorBgEE AYI3FAIDoBoMGG1pY2hhZWwubWlybWFrQGludGVsLmNvbYEYbWljaGFlbC5t aXJtYWtAaW50ZWwuY29tMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBA6KIuxYLLSr/0 5ujtL0PP/SCUvYll8Tsq43MvK9Ha99wDzrDCiy1nepKHHWR5LRUJpigrh7WP Gsm8uXT9xOVHbL5yRwTFwPaCD+PM4b+Jio2KEwBfxU83IG0jcnrNJTk4riNR Eil6YZ5IfxGKdl4j2KjIaDGUBNvgG6LId4XPEUcf+z3kNIb21CcrZ2UkASrv TjyKTJM7k3qw/20CxLAg4y4GbfzwsoY1nuuqjtIXDCw88HnPbenDSXEaq96/ cwsdfQT701KmQ/e452MmR1p1ry9+T+u2fxMtsnuoIOwfyf3UdXRAichEDgbD mBYuHaOvJ4UOjr4mOI+ooj1pZA8AMYID5TCCA+ECAQEwZDBWMQswCQYDVQQG EwJVUzEaMBgGA1UEChMRSW50ZWwgQ29ycG9yYXRpb24xKzApBgNVBAMTIklu dGVsIEV4dGVybmFsIEJhc2ljIElzc3VpbmcgQ0EgM0ICChKVEncAAQAAYrMw CQYFKw4DAhoFAKCCAlYwGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkq hkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNMTEwNjAxMDAwNTU0WjAjBgkqhkiG9w0BCQQxFgQUbIGq ycRv4rFp0wY7dmblHIxKnJ4wUQYLKoZIhvcNAQkQAgExQjBABB0AAAAAEAAA AKD83N2l95pNpFWF1gmDq/cBAAAAAIABADAcMBqBGG1pY2hhZWwubWlybWFr QGludGVsLmNvbTBzBgkrBgEEAYI3EAQxZjBkMFYxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRow GAYDVQQKExFJbnRlbCBDb3Jwb3JhdGlvbjErMCkGA1UEAxMiSW50ZWwgRXh0 ZXJuYWwgQmFzaWMgSXNzdWluZyBDQSAzQgIKaq0xAwAAAAAwDzB1BgsqhkiG 9w0BCRACCzFmoGQwVjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxGjAYBgNVBAoTEUludGVsIENv cnBvcmF0aW9uMSswKQYDVQQDEyJJbnRlbCBFeHRlcm5hbCBCYXNpYyBJc3N1 aW5nIENBIDNCAgpqrTEDAAAAADAPMIG3BgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xgakwgaYwCwYJ YIZIAWUDBAEqMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQBFjAKBggqhkiG9w0DBzALBglghkgBZQME AQIwDgYIKoZIhvcNAwICAgCAMAcGBSsOAwIHMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgFAMA0G CCqGSIb3DQMCAgEoMAcGBSsOAwIaMAsGCWCGSAFlAwQCAzALBglghkgBZQME AgIwCwYJYIZIAWUDBAIBMAoGCCqGSIb3DQIFMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIIB ABJUGxbaqdfRpDJahHvRB7T3UTW1blm70OJ2bUfEfCUMtn4gSwBPTbjQPz4H XrZWnslzH/8+/ijVZEkkYduqXsS6o6tiWVSvx3OYkbSqALvXENKqJxRNaeT7 NO1NMuw5zdbL0hOfFYChcNqHGoqco/H5AT5kyGrhwskAS11HWaX6XAM9TBH0 aM+AgMQHuH87YasWS+t/m2PxUVlfRwivs4BDG3lHenlShwWXYWfC7XdaExtz wbLWi5qZF70aqfqUDj9IufQsQbfkSau0KWsm5mlde5Ub/Mz81kC60FItpY1w kwifz1EKTTkRprPDG2yS5m6/UVD8F1GeeklB4gvCpCsAAAAAAAA= - ------=_NextPart_000_055E_01CC1FB5.003E8260-- - -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - -------------------------------------------------------------------- |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: | | help | subscribe ibis | subscribe ibis-users | unsubscribe ibis | unsubscribe ibis-users | |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. | |IBIS reflector archives exist under: | | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 14:19:56 +0800 From: ji xiao Subject: [IBIS-Users] IBIS ver5.0 [composite current] and [ISSO PU/PD] - --0015175cd70e6eca3704a4a0828f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear all, As I know, for solving the SSN problem, IBIS version 5.0 adds section [composite current] and [ISSO PU/PD]. Then I have some questions: 1. How will the simulator work with the [composite current]? Does it directly adopt the power terminal current value at the [composite current] when the input voltage over the threshold voltage? But I feel different rise/fall time will lead to different current value at the power terminal. 2. The section [ISSO PU/PD] is likely to provide a gate modulation coefficent on the original output current. In specification, the Ipu=Kpu(t)*Ipu(Vcc-Vout(t))*Ksso_pu(Vtable_pu) and Ipd=Kpd(t)*Ipd(Vout(t))*Ksso_pd(Vtabke_pd). so does it mean the total output current is Ipu+Ipd? how does the simulator decide the value of Kpu(t) and Kpd(t) according to the data in IBIS file? Thanks and regards, Yuancheng - -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - --0015175cd70e6eca3704a4a0828f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
As I know, for solving the SSN problem, IBIS version 5.0 adds section = [composite current] and [ISSO PU/PD]. Then I have some questions:
1. How will the simulator work with the [composite current]? Does it d= irectly adopt the power terminal current value at the [composite current] w= hen the input voltage over the threshold voltage? But I feel different rise= /fall time will lead to different current value at the power terminal.
=A0
2. The section [ISSO PU/PD] is likely to provide a gate modulation coe= fficent on the original output current. In specification, the Ipu=3DKpu(t)*= Ipu(Vcc-Vout(t))*Ksso_pu(Vtable_pu) and Ipd=3DKpd(t)*Ipd(Vout(t))*Ksso_pd(V= tabke_pd). so does it mean the total output current is Ipu+Ipd? how does th= e simulator decide the value of Kpu(t) and Kpd(t) according to the data in = IBIS file?
=A0
Thanks and regards,
=A0
Yuancheng

--=20
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean. - --0015175cd70e6eca3704a4a0828f-- - -------------------------------------------------------------------- |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: | | help | subscribe ibis | subscribe ibis-users | unsubscribe ibis | unsubscribe ibis-users | |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. | |IBIS reflector archives exist under: | | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 20:03:35 -0400 From: Scott McMorrow Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. Since the beginning of IBIS, the most accurate simulators would turn the RLC package parasitics into a transmission line equivalent. In lieu of any additional information it is the most reasonable thing to do, since packages can be approximated as transmission lines. Scott McMorrow Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC 121 North River Drive Narragansett, RI 02882 (401) 284-1827 Business (401) 284-1840 Fax http://www.teraspeed.com Teraspeed® is the registered service mark of Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC On 5/31/2011 7:59 PM, Ray Anderson wrote: > If you are using extracted RLC data to manually set up the package model > you can certainly make intelligent decisions on the topology of the > model and the distribution of the RLC parasitics. However if you are > depending on a simulator to read the data from a IBIS .pkg format file > (or the [PIN] data) and set up a model for you then your results may > differ from simulator to simulator. > > -Ray > Xilinx Inc. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Ingraham > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:48 PM > To: ibis-users > Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information > regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. > > Yes. > > I am usually tempted to start with an evenly distributed RLC model ... > unless I have reason to think that the distribution is otherwise. For > example, wirebonds might have most of the inductance and resistance, > whereas the leadframe may have more capacitance, which might influence > one to imbalance those factors unequally between die end and pin end. > But without hard data to back it up, that is just guessing. > > Andy > - -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - -------------------------------------------------------------------- |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: | | help | subscribe ibis | subscribe ibis-users | unsubscribe ibis | unsubscribe ibis-users | |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. | |IBIS reflector archives exist under: | | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 07:53:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "Doug Burns" Subject: RE: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CC20FA.356FE460 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brad, I don't think we really disagree, but let us simplify the statements Given the model you have, what would you agree with: * Single RLC Model ala Simple IBIS o This does not model the resonances o This provides a large discontinuity to a high speed edge * Simple Tline model using RLC Characteristics o This does not model resonance o Better match to actual (ie less ringing than Lumped model) * Better does not mean accurate or correct, just closer to the desired than a lumped model * Package model description in IBIS o Allows finer grain description of detailed models * This can be multiple lumped RLC models or multiple Tlines or any combination. * In the limit, a Tline segment can be modeled as multiple RLC pieces to represent a distributed nature o Will model resonances you speak about at least at first order I assume that you will agree with all of the above. Therefore, what I am saying is that interconnect, by its very physical nature represents a distributed RLC structure. Modeling any segment that is long compared to the edge rate of the signal is better modeled as a Tline than a lumped model such that the distributed nature of the segment can be captured. For the example you cite, a simple RLC does not model the behavior and there is no rational to believe just making the model into a tline model would fix that issues. However, for a multi-segment model using lumped values for each segment, my experience is that using tline models for all segments that have length greater than the 1/3 to 1/2 the rise time (Almost always the case with high speed signals), that a tline description is better than the RLC description. This is true even in the multi-segmented implementation Doug - -----Original Message----- From: Brad Brim [mailto:bradb@sigrity.com] Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 5:55 AM To: 'Doug Burns'; 'Scott McMorrow' Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users' Subject: RE: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. hi guys, Guess we'll agree to disagree. I have experience with any number of simple packages that violate your "better" supposition for a uniformly distributed TL model. Why would this occur, because I completely agree with you that it is counter intuitive. From a package I recently characterized in some detail for system SI/PI analysis; let's say the net behaves as static RLC to 2Ghz, then at about 4GHz there is some form of resonance in the signals or the planes. There's a suckout in the response and then at higher frequencies it behaves more like the TL you guys propose. If you assume the TL, then you completely miss this behavior, and I do mean "completely". For this DDR bus you probably don't care about the spectrum above 8GHz where it is again more TL like. But you certainly DO care about the spectrum between 2Ghz and 6Ghz where it looks nothing like a TL. If I choose properly a TEE or PI circuit to model the behavior in this mid frequency range (since either works to 2Ghz) then you get a much better transient system-level simulation than using your proposed TL model. This is true even though the TEE/PI response at higher frequencies is much worse than the uniform TL model. There is energy in the mid spectrum but not in the high spectrum for this application. If I use a multi-stage RLC model then select the element values to fit the broadband response then I can get match at both mid and high frequencies to well 10Ghz and make all of us happier (but maybe not to 40GHz). This is NOT a corner case. I see it in many of the package I characterize. If I was trying to do a best fit to 40Ghz for this same package because my signals had energy spread out that broadband, then it would probably be better to use the uniform TL model. However, not all applications call for it and the system is much better characterized with a model more correct where the signals actually have energy. cheers, -Brad > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Burns [mailto:dburns@sisoft.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 6:55 AM > To: 'Scott McMorrow'; bradb@sigrity.com > Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users' > Subject: RE: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / > information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. > > All, > > I have to agree with Scott on this. For the type of packages > as outlined by Scott, if one were to take the detailed model > from a simulator and decompose it to a RLC format, the best > correlation between the detailed model and the simplified > model will occur when the simplified RLC is treated as a > distributed structure such as a transmission line. Like > Scott, we have proven this multiple time on a wide variety of > package styles (leadframe through 24+ layer packages). There > is no disagreement that a detailed model will be better, > especially for high frequencies, but we must work within the > limits of what IBIS can support. The mode detailed that > package description is in IBIS, the better estimation we can > make, but using lumped data for high speed signals is just > causing an issue where one really will not exist. EDA tools > need to make the best estimation of the available data to > predict performance. > > Doug > > Douglas Burns > Signal Integrity Software, Inc > 6 Clock Tower Place > Maynard, MA 01754 > 978-461-0449 x14 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org > [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On Behalf Of Scott McMorrow > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 9:33 AM > To: bradb@sigrity.com > Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users' > Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / > information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. > > Brad > > It is certainly your prerogative to disagree with me. In the > context of the original question, we are not talking about > randomly distributed RLC, but rather package connections from > board to silicon, which is the case in most IBIS models. > Given that, we know the general topology. > Whether the package uses lead frame, 2 layer FC packaging, > 2/4 layer organic wire bond packaging, or multilayer buildup > packaging, a single path from die to ball looks remarkably > similar to cascaded transmission lines. Even bond wires look > like transmission lines. > > If I'm given a single RLC for an IBIS model of a > conventionally packaged silicon device , then I can guarantee > you that the simulation will be more faithful to measurements > when the transmission line equivalent is used, rather than > lumped elements. Been there, done the measurements many, > many times. When multiple sections are specified in the IBIS > .pkg format, then there is no ambiguity, a non-zero RLC > section length defines a distributed element, and a zero > length section defines a lumped element. The simulator > should model it as such. > > Having done correlation of package modeling to measurements > from DC to 40 GHz on a 12-layer build-up with near zero > error, I'm well aware of the issues involved with using the > wrong modeling method, and poor material modeling. I agree > with you that a single RLC is an extremely poor approximation > of any complex package interconnect, or any interconnect for > that matter. However, given that a user is presented with an > RLC that was extracted with a quasi-static solver, as is the > case with most IBIS models, I maintain that the result will > be closer to reality when transformed into the distributed > transmission line equivalent. I've seen way too many cases > where simulators used a lumped RLC directly, grossly over > predicting ringing at the die and in the channel, and > confirmed by physical measurements. > > When we get into full-wave and hybrid full-wave AC modeling > of packages there are a host of other issues that we can > discuss, such as accurate dielectric modeling, accurate > surface roughness modeling, as-designed vs. as-built package > geometries, +/- 15% impedance variation due to manufacturing > process and electromagnetic non-locality. But that is for > another time. > > > best regards, > > Scott > > > Scott McMorrow > Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC > 121 North River Drive > Narragansett, RI 02882 > (401) 284-1827 Business > (401) 284-1840 Fax > > http://www.teraspeed.com > > TeraspeedR is the registered service mark of Teraspeed > Consulting Group LLC > > > On 6/1/2011 1:53 AM, Brad Brim wrote: > > hello Scott, > > > > I don't agree with you. Such simulators (or model extractors which > > write > out > > such "postprocessed" model data) are no more assured accurate than > simply > > applying or writing out the base RLC data. > > > > Most package extractors, especially ones you may refer to as > > applicable "from the beginning", are based on static RLC > simulation in > > which a > single L > > and C are extracted at exactly DC from two distinct simulations; > > magnetostatic and electrostatic respectively. One has NO CLUE how to > form > > the equivalent circuit given only the static lumped L and C > computed > > independently. Of course, as asked and discussed by Ray, if > the user > > has insight from the physical structure then a more broadband model > > MIGHT be generated, but there is no guarantee! > > One person assuming a PI circuit (with the C split equally > in half - > > or > even > > unequally - and the L in the middle) and another person > assuming a TEE > > circuit (with the L split and the shunt C in the middle) are no more > correct > > than the other. One has NO IDEA of the high frequency > behavior of the > > circuit (either just above the quasistatic limit where the likely > spectral > > content is relevant or higher where it is less likely relevant) > > without > some > > form of AC high-frequency simulation or measurement. The > behavior at > > "infinite" frequency in meaningless and to argue that a uniformly > > distributed multi-stage ladder network is valid has no more > justification > > than another person arguing it should me a lowpass network with all > > the inductance on the die side because of wirebond inductance. This > > argument > has > > blindly been accepted and argued for many years. It has been > > unjustified > and > > wrong, as you would say, "from the beginning". > > > > Want a valid model at higher frequencies, then extract AC > information > from > > which to generate it. One's guess or intuitive argument without AC > > information to back it up is only a guess, as Andy stated. The > > classical uniformly distributed ladder network is a > deceptively simple > > and > intuitively > > pleasing assumption that is easy to understand and unfortunately > accepted by > > way too many people in the industry. This supposed more > accurate guess > has > > failed in too many cases and can even be worse than a > simple totally > > unbalanced low pass filter assumption over the frequency > spectrum of > > relevance. > > > > Many commercially available RLC extractors continue to make this > assumption > > today. Users are placed at significant risk because they falsely > > believe > the > > model is in some sense "broadband" or "wideband". It is a > guess with > > no guarantee to be any better than any other assumed more > distributed > > equivalent circuit for which there is no theoretical or physical > > justification. > > > > If one starts with AC data, assumes an equivalent circuit and *then* > selects > > element values in such to fit the data then there is reason to argue > this is > > a more valid model at higher frequencies. One cannot do > this from only > DC > > terminal-based data. Not that it's difficult, it is impossible. > > > > best regards, > > -Brad > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org > >> [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On Behalf Of Scott McMorrow > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 5:04 PM > >> To: Ray Anderson > >> Cc: ibis-users; Ray Anderson > >> Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information > >> regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. > >> > >> Since the beginning of IBIS, the most accurate simulators > would turn > >> the RLC package parasitics into a transmission line > equivalent. In > >> lieu of any additional information it is the most > reasonable thing to > >> do, since packages can be approximated as transmission lines. > >> > >> > >> Scott McMorrow > >> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC > >> 121 North River Drive > >> Narragansett, RI 02882 > >> (401) 284-1827 Business > >> (401) 284-1840 Fax > >> > >> http://www.teraspeed.com > >> > >> TeraspeedR is the registered service mark of Teraspeed Consulting > >> Group LLC > >> > >> > >> On 5/31/2011 7:59 PM, Ray Anderson wrote: > >>> If you are using extracted RLC data to manually set up > the package > >>> model you can certainly make intelligent decisions on the > >> topology of > >>> the model and the distribution of the RLC parasitics. > >> However if you > >>> are depending on a simulator to read the data from a IBIS > >> .pkg format > >>> file (or the [PIN] data) and set up a model for you then > >> your results > >>> may differ from simulator to simulator. > >>> > >>> -Ray > >>> Xilinx Inc. > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org > [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On > >>> Behalf Of Andrew Ingraham > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:48 PM > >>> To: ibis-users > >>> Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information > >>> regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation. > >>> > >>> Yes. > >>> > >>> I am usually tempted to start with an evenly distributed > >> RLC model ... > >>> unless I have reason to think that the distribution is > >> otherwise. For > >>> example, wirebonds might have most of the inductance and > >> resistance, > >>> whereas the leadframe may have more capacitance, which > >> might influence > >>> one to imbalance those factors unequally between die end > >> and pin end. > >>> But without hard data to back it up, that is just guessing. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >> -- > >> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by > >> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. > >> > >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail > majordomo@eda-stds.org > >> |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: > >> | > >> | help > >> | subscribe ibis > >> | subscribe ibis-users > >> | unsubscribe ibis > >> | unsubscribe ibis-users > >> | > >> |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. > >> | > >> |IBIS reflector archives exist under: > >> | > >> | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent > >> | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent > >> | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail > since 1993 > >> > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous > content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org > |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: > | > | help > | subscribe ibis > | subscribe ibis-users > | unsubscribe ibis > | unsubscribe ibis-users > | > |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. > | > |IBIS reflector archives exist under: > | > | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent > | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent > | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993 > - -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. - ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CC20FA.356FE460 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Brad,

 

 I don't think we really disagree, but let us simplify the statements

 Given the model you have, what would you agree with:

·         Single RLC Model ala Simple IB= IS

o = ;       This does not model the resona= nces

o = ;       This provides a large disconti= nuity to a high speed edge

·         Simple Tline model using RLC Characteristics

o = ;       This does not model resonance<= o:p>

o = ;       Better match to actual (ie less ringing than Lumped model)

§         Better does not mean accurate = or correct, just closer to the desired than a lumped model

·         Package model description in I= BIS

o = ;       Allows finer grain description= of detailed models

§         This can be multiple lumped RLC models or multiple Tlines or any combination.

§         In the limit, a Tline segment = can be modeled as multiple RLC pieces to represent a distributed nature

o = ;       Will model resonances you speak about at least at first order

 

I assume that you will agree with all of the above.

 

Therefore, what I am saying is that interconnect, by its very physi= cal nature represents a distributed RLC structure. Modeling any segment that is long compared to the edge rate of the signal is better modeled as a Tline than a lumped model such that the distributed nature of the segment can be capture= d.

 

For the example you cite, a simple RLC does not model the behavior = and there is no rational to believe just making the model into a tline model wo= uld fix that issues. However, for a multi-segment model using lumped values for each segment, my experience is that using tline models for all segments that have length greater than the 1/3 to 1/2 the rise time (Almost always the ca= se with high speed signals), that a tline description is better than the RLC description. This is true even in the multi-segmented implementation <= /o:p>

 

 Doug

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Brim [mailto:bradb@sigrity.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 5:55 AM
To: 'Doug Burns'; 'Scott McMorrow'
Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users'
Subject: RE: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information regarding = the use of IBIS in SI simulation.

 

hi guys,

 

Guess we'll agree to disagree.

 

I have experience with any number of simple packages that violate y= our

"better" supposition for a uniformly distributed TL model. Why would this

occur, because I completely agree with you that it is counter intuitive.

 

From a package I recently characterized in some detail for system S= I/PI

analysis; let's say the net behaves as static RLC to 2Ghz, then at about

4GHz there is some form of resonance in the signals or the planes. There's a

suckout in the response and then at higher frequencies it behaves m= ore like

the TL you guys propose. If you assume the TL, then you completely = miss this

behavior, and I do mean "completely". For this DDR bus you probably don't

care about the spectrum above 8GHz where it is again more TL like. = But you

certainly DO care about the spectrum between 2Ghz and 6Ghz where it looks

nothing like a TL. If I choose properly a TEE or PI circuit to model the

behavior in this mid frequency range (since either works to 2Ghz) t= hen you

get a much better transient system-level simulation than using your proposed

TL model. This is true even though the TEE/PI response at higher frequencies

is much worse than the uniform TL model. There is energy in the mid spectrum

but not in the high spectrum for this application. If I use a multi-stage

RLC model then select the element values to fit the broadband respo= nse then

I can get match at both mid and high frequencies to well 10Ghz and = make all

of us happier (but maybe not to 40GHz).

 

This is NOT a corner case. I see it in many of the package I characterize.

If I was trying to do a best fit to 40Ghz for this same package bec= ause my

signals had energy spread out that broadband, then it would probabl= y be

better to use the uniform TL model. However, not all applications c= all for

it and the system is much better characterized with a model more correct

where the signals actually have energy.

 

cheers,

 -Brad

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Doug Burns [mailto:dburns@sisoft.com] =

> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 6:55 AM

> To: 'Scott McMorrow'; bradb@sigrity.com

> Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users'

> Subject: RE: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help /

> information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation.

>

> All,

>

>  I have to agree with Scott on this. For the type of pack= ages

> as outlined by Scott, if one were to take the detailed model <= o:p>

> from a simulator and decompose it to a RLC format, the best

> correlation between the detailed model and the simplified

> model will occur when the simplified RLC is treated as a =

> distributed structure such as a transmission line. Like <= /o:p>

> Scott, we have proven this multiple time on a wide variety of =

> package styles (leadframe through 24+ layer packages). There <= o:p>

> is no disagreement that a detailed model will be better, =

> especially for high frequencies, but we must work within the <= o:p>

> limits of what IBIS can support. The mode detailed that <= /o:p>

> package description is in IBIS, the better estimation we can <= o:p>

> make, but using lumped data for high speed signals is just

> causing an issue where one really will not exist. EDA tools

> need to make the best estimation of the available data to

> predict performance.

>

> Doug

>

> Douglas Burns

> Signal Integrity Software, Inc

> 6 Clock Tower= Place

> Maynard, MA 01754

> 978-461-0449 x14

>

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org

> [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On Behalf Of Scott McMorrow<= o:p>

> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 9:33 AM

> To: bradb@sigrity.com

> Cc: 'Ray Anderson'; 'ibis-users'

> Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help /

> information regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation.

>

> Brad

>

> It is certainly your prerogative to disagree with me.  In= the

> context of the original question, we are not talking about

> randomly distributed RLC, but rather package connections from =

> board to silicon, which is the case in most IBIS models. =

> Given that, we know the general topology. 

> Whether the package uses lead frame, 2 layer FC packaging,

> 2/4 layer organic wire bond packaging, or multilayer buildup <= o:p>

> packaging, a single path from die to ball looks remarkably

> similar to cascaded transmission lines.  Even bond wires = look

> like transmission lines.

>

> If I'm given a single RLC for an IBIS model of a

> conventionally packaged silicon device , then I can guarantee =

> you that the simulation will be more faithful to measurements =

> when the transmission line equivalent is used, rather than

> lumped elements.  Been there, done the measurements many,=

> many times.  When multiple sections are specified in the = IBIS

> .pkg format, then there is no ambiguity, a non-zero RLC <= /o:p>

> section length defines a distributed element, and a zero =

> length section defines a lumped element.  The simulator <= o:p>

> should model it as such.

>

> Having done correlation of package modeling to measurements

> from DC to 40 GHz on a 12-layer build-up with near zero <= /o:p>

> error, I'm well aware of the issues involved with using the

> wrong modeling method, and poor material modeling.  I agr= ee

> with you that a single RLC is an extremely poor approximation =

> of any complex package interconnect, or any interconnect for <= o:p>

> that matter.  However, given that a user is presented wit= h an

> RLC that was extracted with a quasi-static solver, as is the <= o:p>

> case with most IBIS models, I maintain that the result will

> be closer to reality when transformed into the distributed

> transmission line equivalent.  I've seen way too many cas= es

> where simulators used a lumped RLC directly, grossly over

> predicting  ringing at the die and in the channel, and

> confirmed by physical measurements.

>

> When we get into full-wave and hybrid full-wave AC modeling

> of packages there are a host of other issues that we can =

> discuss, such as accurate dielectric modeling, accurate <= /o:p>

> surface roughness modeling, as-designed vs. as-built package <= o:p>

> geometries, +/- 15% impedance variation due to manufacturing <= o:p>

> process  and electromagnetic non-locality.  But that= is for

> another time.

>

>

> best regards,

>

> Scott

>

>

> Scott McMorrow

> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC

> 121 North Riv= er Drive

> Narragansett, RI 02882

> (401) 284-1827 Business

> (401) 284-1840 Fax

>

> http://www.teraspeed.com

>

> TeraspeedR is the registered service mark of Teraspeed

> Consulting Group LLC

>

>

> On 6/1/2011 1:53 AM, Brad Brim wrote:=

> > hello Scott,

> >

> > I don't agree with you. Such simulators (or model extract= ors which

> > write

> out

> > such "postprocessed" model data) are no more assured accurate than

> simply

> > applying or writing out the base RLC data.

> >

> > Most package extractors, especially ones you may refer to= as

> > applicable "from the beginning", are based on static RLC

> simulation in

> > which a

> single L

> > and C are extracted at exactly DC from two distinct simulations;

> > magnetostatic and electrostatic respectively. One has NO = CLUE how to

> form

> > the equivalent circuit given only the static lumped L and= C

> computed

> > independently. Of course, as asked and discussed by Ray, = if

> the user

> > has insight from the physical structure then a more broad= band model

> > MIGHT be generated, but there is no guarantee!=

> > One person assuming a PI circuit (with the C split equall= y

> in half -

> > or

> even

> > unequally - and the L in the middle) and another person <= o:p>

> assuming a TEE

> > circuit (with the L split and the shunt C in the middle) = are no more

> correct

> > than the other. One has NO IDEA of the high frequency

> behavior of the

> > circuit (either just above the quasistatic limit where the likely

> spectral

> > content is relevant or higher where it is less likely relevant)

> > without

> some

> > form of AC high-frequency simulation or measurement. The =

> behavior at

> > "infinite" frequency in meaningless and to argue that a uniformly

> > distributed multi-stage ladder network is valid has no mo= re

> justification

> > than another person arguing it should me a lowpass network with all

> > the inductance on the die side because of wirebond induct= ance. This

> > argument

> has

> > blindly been accepted and argued for many years. It has b= een

> > unjustified

> and

> > wrong, as you would say, "from the beginning".<= o:p>

> >

> > Want a valid model at higher frequencies, then extract AC=

> information

> from

> > which to generate it. One's guess or intuitive argument without AC

> > information to back it up is only a guess, as Andy stated. The

> > classical uniformly distributed ladder network is a =

> deceptively simple

> > and

> intuitively

> > pleasing assumption that is easy to understand and unfortunately

> accepted by

> > way too many people in the industry. This supposed more <= o:p>

> accurate guess

> has

> > failed in too many cases and can even be worse than a

> simple totally

> > unbalanced low pass filter assumption over the frequency =

> spectrum of

> > relevance.

> >

> > Many commercially available RLC extractors continue to ma= ke this

> assumption

> > today. Users are placed at significant risk because they falsely

> > believe

> the

> > model is in some sense "broadband" or "wideband". It is a

> guess with

> > no guarantee to be any better than any other assumed more=

> distributed

> > equivalent circuit for which there is no theoretical or physical

> > justification.

> >

> > If one starts with AC data, assumes an equivalent circuit= and *then*

> selects

> > element values in such to fit the data then there is reas= on to argue

> this is

> > a more valid model at higher frequencies. One cannot do <= o:p>

> this from only

> DC

> > terminal-based data. Not that it's difficult, it is impossible.

> >

> > best regards,

> >   -Brad

> >

> >

> >> -----Original Message-----

> >> From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org

> >> [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On Behalf Of Scott McMorrow

> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 5:04 PM=

> >> To: Ray Anderson

> >> Cc: ibis-users; Ray Anderson=

> >> Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some help / information

> >> regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation.

> >>

> >> Since the beginning of IBIS, the most accurate simula= tors

> would turn

> >> the RLC package parasitics into a transmission line <= o:p>

> equivalent.  In

> >> lieu of any additional information it is the most

> reasonable thing to

> >> do, since packages can be approximated as transmission lines.

> >>

> >>

> >> Scott McMorrow

> >> Teraspeed Consulting Group LLC

> >> 121 North River Dr= ive

> >> Narragan= sett, RI 02882

> >> (401) 284-1827 Business

> >> (401) 284-1840 Fax

> >>

> >> http://www.teraspeed.com

> >>

> >> TeraspeedR is the registered service mark of Teraspeed Consulting

> >> Group LLC

> >>

> >>

> >> On 5/31/2011 7:59 PM, Ray Anderson wrote:<= /span>

> >>> If you are using extracted RLC data to manually s= et up

> the package

> >>> model you can certainly make intelligent decision= s on the

> >> topology of

> >>> the model and the distribution of the RLC parasit= ics.

> >> However if you

> >>> are depending on a simulator to read the data fro= m a IBIS

> >> .pkg format

> >>> file (or the [PIN] data) and set up a model for y= ou then

> >> your results

> >>> may differ from simulator to simulator.

> >>>

> >>> -Ray

> >>> Xilinx Inc.

> >>>

> >>>

> >>> -----Original Message-----

> >>> From: owner-ibis-users@eda.org =

> [mailto:owner-ibis-users@eda.org] On =

> >>> Behalf Of Andrew Ingraham

> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:48 PM

> >>> To: ibis-users

> >>> Subject: Re: [IBIS-Users] Requesting for some hel= p / information

> >>> regarding the use of IBIS in SI simulation.<= /o:p>

> >>>

> >>> Yes.

> >>>

> >>> I am usually tempted to start with an evenly distributed

> >> RLC model ...

> >>> unless I have reason to think that the distributi= on is

> >> otherwise.  For

> >>> example, wirebonds might have most of the inducta= nce and

> >> resistance,

> >>> whereas the leadframe may have more capacitance, which

> >> might influence

> >>> one to imbalance those factors unequally between = die end

> >> and pin end.

> >>> But without hard data to back it up, that is just guessing.

> >>>

> >>> Andy

> >>>

> >> --

> >> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangero= us content by

> >> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.<= /span>

> >>

> >>

> - --------------------------------------------------------------------

> >> |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail

> majordomo@eda-stds.org

> >> |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body:=

> >> |

> >> |  help

> >> |  subscribe   ibis<optional e-mail address, if different>

> >> |  subscribe   ibis-users<optional e-mail address, if different>

> >> |  unsubscribe ibis<optional e-mail address, = if different> 

> >> | unsubscribe ibis-users<optional e-mail address, = if different>

> >> |

> >> |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org.

> >> |

> >> |IBIS reflector archives exist under:

> >> |

> >> |  http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archiv= e/ Recent

> >> | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Rec= ent

> >> |  http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/      =    E-mail

> since 1993

> >>

>

> --

> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous <= /o:p>

> content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.

>

> - --------------------------------------------------------------------

> |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org

> |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body:

> |

> |  help

> |  subscribe   ibis       <optional e-mail address, if different>

> |  subscribe   ibis-users <optional e-mail address, if different>

> |  unsubscribe ibis       <optional e-mail address, if different>

> |  unsubscribe ibis-users <optional e-mail address, if different>

> |

> |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org.<= /span>

> |

> |IBIS reflector archives exist under:=

> |

> |  http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent 

> | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent<= /o:p>

> |  http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/  &nb= sp;      E-mail since 1993

>

 


--=20
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean. - ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01CC20FA.356FE460-- - -------------------------------------------------------------------- |For help or to subscribe/unsubscribe, e-mail majordomo@eda-stds.org |with the appropriate command message(s) in the body: | | help | subscribe ibis | subscribe ibis-users | unsubscribe ibis | unsubscribe ibis-users | |or e-mail a request to ibis-request@eda-stds.org. | |IBIS reflector archives exist under: | | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/users_archive/ Recent | http://www.eda-stds.org/pub/ibis/email/ E-mail since 1993 ------------------------------ End of ibis-users V1 #174 *************************